C'mon, this ain't exactly rocket science, the media supported him the first because the libs did, after they stopped supporting his, they all just on the bandwagon and quite supporting him.........maybe it was just Murdoch who had the ball to say who he supported, BTW, kinda blows Zack's therorie doesn't it?
Murdoch went on to say that due to Bush's execution of the war, his support was in the past tense. i'll let the exact quotes detail that, since I can't do it verbatim. Zack may very well be proven right, as Murdoch does eat dinner with hilary once a week, and has for years
I watch hours of news, all day every day. The media loved Bush when the public loved bush, and they bashed bush once public support waned.
This isn't about libs or neocons. it's about money. Nobody would have watched Olbermann bash Bush on 9/12/01, would they? But today? He's doing well because he is bashing Bush, something that 75% of America is also doing.
FOX? They had to make a choice - swing to moderate level with eveyrone else, or stay right. They made the business decision to stay far right (and orieilly announced it on his show in Dec). They're trying to strngthen that 25%, as they KNOW they have lost the other 75%.
It's about money. If Bush admitted 9/11 and WMD lies tomorrow, what would OReilly talk about? Whatever the viewer research dept told him would be most effective. They are actors - all of them. From Bill to Olbermann. They appeal to a target audience, and they speak positions that sell.
